A Union of Political Emigrants from Russia has been established in Ukraine. The head of the new organisation is Russian opposition activist Olga Kudrina, who has received asylum in Ukraine. The organisation held a press conference on 23 February 2010 in Kiev. Denis Bilunov, chairman of the executive committee of Russia's opposition Solidarity coalition, explained why an increasing number of journalists, human rights defenders, civic activists, and others have been forced to leave Russia and seek asylum abroad.

The number of activists forced to leave Russia because of political harassment is on the increase. Political activists face fabricated criminal cases, partial judges, and extrajudicial reprisals. Ukraine is one the countries which has granted asylum to Russian citizens persecuted by their own government. The new wave of political emigration has, however, failed to gain the attention it deserves in society. The Union of Political Emigrants strives to bring the problem of political emigration from Russia into the public limelight.

"In Russia today, people who openly voice opinions that differ from those of the government, who voice criticism of the ruling regime, or who find themselves simply in the way of the authorities, are often subjected to harassment and repression. There are no signs of any improvements in the human rights situation in Russia. We established the Union of Political Emigrants to help people who have fled Russia and applied for asylum to overcome the difficulties they will face in their new situation," Olga Kudrina explained.

The Union of Political Emigrants was established by Russian political refugees to unite citizens of the Russian Federation who have been forced to leave their country because of harassment by the authorities, and to help them claim their rights. The organisation distributes information about the problem of political emigration and its reasons, provides legal and publicity support to political emigrants from Russia, and promotes the integration of political emigrants in the countries where they have received asylum.

http://politemigrant.org/index.php/news/256-spe23022010

Tapahtumaan saapui Moskovasta puhumaan Solidaarisuus-likkeen johtajia Boris Nemtsov, Vladimir Milov ja Ilja Jashin. Mielenosoittajat vaativat myös Kaliningradin kaupungin johtajan Georgi Boosin sekä pääministeri Putinin ja hänen hallituksensa eroa. Eri arvioiden mukaan mielenosoitukseen osallistui 5000 - 12 000 ihmistä.

Kaliningradin alueella tiivistyvät monet ongelmat, sosiaalinen kurjistuminen, rapistuva infrastruktuuri ja korkea työttömyys. Euroopan keskellä kaliningradilaiset tuntevat jääneensä loukkuun. Moskova ei välitä heistä, mutta ilman Schengen-viisumia ei EU:n alueelle ole pääsyä.

http://mariuver.wordpress.com/2010/01/31/kaliningr-putina/

On Friday, Putin warned against the dangers of totalitarianism and despotism:

We should not allow the "Ukraine-ization" of political life in Russia but we should on no account slide in the other direction, towards totalitarianism and despotism.

Putin also called for cautious reform of the Russian political system:

We need to bring in necessary amendments but we need to act extremely carefully. Any effective political system needs a healthy level of conservatism. A political system should not wobble like liquid jelly every time it's touched.

Putin harshly rejected a call for officials to examine complaints on the Internet about vote rigging in the recent regional elections:

On the Internet, 50 percent is porn material. Why should we refer to the Internet?

Putin was speaking at a major meeting chaired by President Dmitry Medvedev and attended by Russia's political elite. Putin's stern comments contrasted with a speech by Medvedev, who called for a shake-up of the country's political system to promote opposition parties, criticising "non-existent" competition in local government. The more tech-savvy Medvedev is also a keen user of the Internet and has a video blog.

Source AFP.

1. Successful team of leaders: United Civic Front's Garry Kasparov, Popular Democratic Union's Mikhail Kasyanov, and National Bolshevik Party's Eduard Limonov. Each appealed to a different audience: Kasparov to the liberal intelligentsia, Kasyanov to the middle class, and Limonov to the radical left. Unfortunately, the alliance later fell apart.

2. Wide spectrum of themes: The first marches attracted a great number of people of various backgrounds because the demonstrations were not limited to a single main theme. The marches were able to bring together liberals worried about the freedom of speech, businessmen fed up with bureacratic abuses, and people concerned with social problems.

3. Creating an image of strength: The marchers demonstrated great confidence in themselves and their power to change things. They did not shy away from making risky statements in defiance of the authorities, and did not stop even when the police way outnumbered the marchers and used brutal force to suppress them.

4. Professional preparatory work: The organising committee of the Marches of Dissent worked very effectively. The campaign material --newspapers, flyers, and stickers-- was well thought out and distributed in time. The official paper and other material of the Marches of Dissent stood out with their quality design. Activists were brought in from regional centres.

5. The money was there: Compared with the rather despondent demonstrations that we have seen lately, the Marches of Dissent were quite costly to organise, yet much less expensive per participant than any opposition conference. The fruits of the marches were much greater than what we have seen since.

http://welgar.livejournal.com/496354.html